High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 06 KL CK 0075

Lathika Viswanathan vs State of Kerala, The Chief Conservator of Forests and The Accountant General (A and E)

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 14 June 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Antony Dominic, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) . No. 18379 of 2010 (V)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 341 words

Antony Dominic, J.—The petitioner''s husband, late Shri R. Viswanathan, retired from service on 31/01/2000, as an Assistant Conservator of Forests. According to the petitioner, by Ext.P2, he was sanctioned senior grade with effect from 31/12/1995. However, the benefit of Ext.P2 was given only with effect from 09/01/2003, the date on which the said order was issued.

2.

This issue according to the petitioner was the subject matter of litigation before this Court resulting in Ext.P3 judgment, where the claim was upheld and it was directed that the benefit of Ext.P2 should be given with effect from the date on which the benefit has been sanctioned and not from the date of the Order. It is stated that the judgment has been confirmed by the Division Bench by dismissing the appeal filed by the State, a copy of which is Ext.P4.

3.

Soon after Ext.P4 judgment, the petitioner''s husband expired on 26/12/2006 and as a result thereof, the matter could not be prosecuted. It is stated that coming to know about the details, the petitioner submitted Exts.P5 & P6 representations referring to Exts.P3 & P4 judgments and seeking the benefit of the said judgments. It is stated that although benefit of the judgments has been extended to several other persons, this benefit has not been extended to her so far. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed.

If as stated by the petitioner, by virtue of the judgments relied on by her, her husband was eligible for the benefit, there is no reason why the claim shall not be considered. Be that as it may, having regard to the pendency of Ext.P6 representation, it is directed that the said representation shall be considered by the 1st respondent in the light of Exts.P2, P3 & P4 referred to above. Orders on Ext.P6 shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.